January 29, 2010 

The Honorable Kathleen Sebelius

Secretary 

Department of Health and Human Services 

200 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20201 

 Dear Madam Secretary: 

This is the second report from the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health describing the activities and progress related to our overview of the 

procedures developed by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and 

Health in fulfilling the requirement of the Energy Employees Occupational 

Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA). Section 3642(b)(42 U.S.C. 

§7384o (b)(2) of the Act directs that the Board shall advise the President on 

the “scientific validity and quality of efforts being performed for purposes of 

the compensation program.” 

As detailed in our initial report dated July 18, 2008, as part of our 

responsibility to assure the completeness and scientific validity of procedures 

being used by NIOSH to receive, process, and complete claims, the Board 

has selected groups of procedures and supplementary documents for indepth review. This professional review is a major function of the Board’s 

technical contractor, Sanford Cohen and Associates (SC&A), and is 

administered by the Board’s Subcommittee on Procedure Reviews. The 

Subcommittee was originally established in October, 2006, as the Work 

Group on Procedures; due to the continuing nature of its responsibilities, the 

Work Group was chartered as a Subcommittee in August, 2009. The 

Subcommittee consists of five Board members, Wanda Munn, Chair; Michael 

H. Gibson; Mark Griffon; Dr. Paul Ziemer; and Robert Presley, alternate. 

To date the Board has selected three sets of critical procedures being utilized 

by NIOSH in performing program requirements. The first set was selected in 

2005, the second in 2006, and the third set 2007, thus encompassing the 

period of highest activity in the development and implementation of agency 

process. In each case, SC&A was directed to perform a thorough technical 

review to identify any concerns, technical issues, or potential weakness in the 

procedural method. In the course of the Board’s deliberations, other 

individual procedures have been of sufficient significance to be added to the 

collection already under review. The complete group of procedures so 

scrutinized totals 105, including revision of certain procedures when 

circumstances appeared to require that action. The number of individual 

findings totals 538, more than 80% of which have been deliberated upon and 

49% of the total have been closed. 

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH

4676 Columbia Parkway, MS: C-46 

Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

(513) 533-6825

CHAIRMAN:

Paul L. Ziemer, Ph.D. 

 Lafayette, Indiana 

MEMBERS:

Josie Beach 

 Richland, Washington 

Bradley P. Clawson 

 Rexburg, Idaho 

Michael H. Gibson 

 Franklin, Ohio 

Mark A. Griffon 

 Salem, New Hampshire 

James E. Lockey, M.D. 

 Cincinnati, Ohio 

James M. Melius, M.D., Ph.D. 

 Albany, New York 

Wanda I. Munn 

 Richland, Washington 

John W. Poston, Sr., Ph.D. 

 College Station, Texas 

Robert W. Presley 

 Seymour, Tennessee 

Genevieve S. Roessler, Ph.D. 

 Elysian, Minnesota 

Phillip Schofield 

 Bosque Farm, New Mexico 

STAFF:

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY:

Theodore M. Katz, MPA 

 Atlanta, Georgia 

COMMITTEE MANAGEMENT :

Zaida Burgos 

 Atlanta, Georgia 
The Honorable Kathleen Sebelius January 29, 2010 

Findings and observations made from the technical reviews range from minor issues with no 

measurable impact on compensation decisions to matters of scientific debate which may have 

complex-wide implications. Initially, these findings and the resultant process of addressing them 

was undertaken with a spread-sheet matrix tool for tracking progress. Subsequently a dedicated 

database tracking system has been developed. 

The depth of scrutiny and level of detail pursued in bringing the findings to closure has had 

significant impact on the quality and technical accuracy of the procedures used throughout the 

program. 

 

 Multiple modifications have been made to procedures, including some changes of 

such a nature that new revisions of the document were required. 

 By highlighting subjects which recurred in the review of procedures for individual 

sites, the Board has been able to identify several ‘overarching issues’ which have 

potential for complex-wide concern. 

 The process of identifying these recurring topics has been a major factor in the 

ongoing process of administering and eliminating redundancy from the procedure 

collection. 

The Subcommittee continues to meet at approximately six week intervals, with extensive interim 

communication taking place among the involved parties. It is the consensus of the Board that this 

process continues to be effective in assuring the clarity, efficiency, and scientific accuracy of the 

procedures in use. A current summary of the status of the findings is attached in both tabular and 

graphic format. The glossary of terms being used in these applications is included at the foot of the 

numeric table. 

We trust you will find this information of value. If you desire or require additional information on the 

work of the Subcommittee, we will be most pleased to provide you with whatever detail you wish. 

Sincerely, 

 [Signature on file] 

Paul L. Ziemer, Ph.D. 

Chair 

 

Enclosure 

 
Table 1. Summary of Numbers of Findings and their Disposition 

Finding 

Date 

Number of 

Total Findings Open 

In 

Progress

In 

Abeyance

Addressed 

in Finding Transferred Closed

1/17/2005 183 44 4 4 131 

6/8/2006 112 1 6 13 4 10 78 

7/30/2007 16 6 1 1 2 6 

9/20/2007 8 1 2 5 

10/29/2007 145 54 20 24 1 10 36 

11/9/2007 9 9 

3/17/2008 26 26 

4/21/2008 13 13 

8/29/2008 15 15 

12/8/2008 4 2 2 

3/30/2009 7 6 1 

TOTALS 538 111 33 86 15 39 254 

Percentage of Total 

Findings 21% 6% 16% 3% 7% 47% 

Open No meeting discussion has occurred concerning this finding 

Open – In Process Some meeting discussion started – more work needs to be done on finding 

In Abeyance Finding has been addressed but resolution is that NIOSH will change procedure – 

 Closed from the Board’s perspective 

Addressed In Finding Multiple finding in a Procedure – All findings are effected with correction of the first finding 

Transferred Transferred to another Work Group or to OCAS 

Closed Finding Closed from the Board’s perspective
Figure 1. Bar Graph Summary of Findings and Their Disposition 

(Note: Dates represent Subcommittee meeting dates at which findings were dealt wi

0

100200300400500600

Mar-08 May-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Mar-09 May-09 Au

Number of Findings
Figure 2. Bar Graph Summary of Findings and Their Disposition by Perce

(Note: Dates represent Subcommittee meeting dates at which findings were dealt wi

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Mar-08 May-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Mar-09 May-09 Au

Percent of Findings